Religion & PhilosophyDiscuss More Americans Say Personal Immorality Not Disqualifying for Elected Officials at the General Discussion; I've heard people repeatedly criticize atheists on the issue of morality. Some people evidently have limited or no comprehension how ...

More Americans Say Personal Immorality Not Disqualifying for Elected Officials

I've heard people repeatedly criticize atheists on the issue of morality. Some people evidently have limited or no comprehension how a moral structure can exist without somebody telling you what to think...

I found the below quite amusing in that context.

No group has shifted their position more dramatically than white evangelical Protestants. More than seven in ten (72%) white evangelical Protestants say an elected official can behave ethically even if they have committed transgressions in their personal life—a 42-point jump from 2011, when only 30 % of white evangelical Protestants said the same. Roughly six in ten white mainline Protestants (60%) and Catholics (58%) also believe elected officials can behave honestly and ethically in their public roles regardless of their personal behavior. In 2011, only about four in ten white mainline Protestants (38%) and Catholics (42%) held this view. Notably, religiously unaffiliated Americans have remained constant in their views; six in ten (60%) believe elected officials who behave immorally in their personal lives can still perform their duties with integrity, compared to 63% in 2011.

When you base your morality just on what others tell you to think, it can easily change when inconvenient.Actually reasoning your way through morality is what makes it strong.

__________________
“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”
~Abraham Lincoln

Re: More Americans Say Personal Immorality Not Disqualifying for Elected Officials

Quote:

Originally Posted by foundit66

I've heard people repeatedly criticize atheists on the issue of morality. Some people evidently have limited or no comprehension how a moral structure can exist without somebody telling you what to think...

I found the below quite amusing in that context.

I was told by an ex-member here that I have no moral compass.

Everybody is human, and we all have tripped a time or two along the path of moral perfection (religion guided or not). I think what factors into accepting a person's temporary slip can be not only the type of slip, but the degree of slip.

There is a difference between doing something stupid once, and doing it over and over again.

And bottom line, lying about it.

__________________Your life is the sum total of the choices you make.If you can't laugh at yourself, you might as well get embalmed

Re: More Americans Say Personal Immorality Not Disqualifying for Elected Officials

Quote:

Originally Posted by foundit66

[indent]No group has shifted their position more dramatically than white evangelical Protestants. More than seven in ten (72%) white evangelical Protestants say an elected official can behave ethically even if they have committed transgressions in their personal life—a 42-point jump from 2011, when only 30 % of white evangelical Protestants said the same.

Don't want to say this is the reason for the dramatic shift, but it would make sense for them to adjust their views in order to swallow what they did.

Quote:

Exit polls show white evangelical voters voted in high numbers for Donald Trump, 80-16 percent, according to exit poll results. That’s the most they have voted for a Republican presidential candidate since 2004, when they overwhelmingly chose President George W. Bush by a margin of 78-21 percent.

Re: More Americans Say Personal Immorality Not Disqualifying for Elected Officials

Quote:

Originally Posted by foundit66

I've heard people repeatedly criticize atheists on the issue of morality. Some people evidently have limited or no comprehension how a moral structure can exist without somebody telling you what to think...

I found the below quite amusing in that context.

No group has shifted their position more dramatically than white evangelical Protestants. More than seven in ten (72%) white evangelical Protestants say an elected official can behave ethically even if they have committed transgressions in their personal life—a 42-point jump from 2011, when only 30 % of white evangelical Protestants said the same. Roughly six in ten white mainline Protestants (60%) and Catholics (58%) also believe elected officials can behave honestly and ethically in their public roles regardless of their personal behavior. In 2011, only about four in ten white mainline Protestants (38%) and Catholics (42%) held this view. Notably, religiously unaffiliated Americans have remained constant in their views; six in ten (60%) believe elected officials who behave immorally in their personal lives can still perform their duties with integrity, compared to 63% in 2011.

When you base your morality just on what others tell you to think, it can easily change when inconvenient.Actually reasoning your way through morality is what makes it strong.

I mostly agree. I don't get the atheist animosity thing. Atheist the only religion that is automatically preceded by a pejorative adjective by those of other faiths. The ones who find a need to devote half a day or more/week to listening to others determine their morals.

Religious wise, I could vote for a person of any religion, except for those who state they put religious beliefs above the Constitution.

As for transgressions in personal life transferring to political decisions? I'm not sure. That would depend.

I don't care if you get the occasional out of wedlock oral satisfaction. I care if I think you intend to make political decisions based in your personal pocketbook.

Re: More Americans Say Personal Immorality Not Disqualifying for Elected Officials

Unfortunately for the left, more than anyone, this presents them a conundrum. Because evangelical protestants don't see things in such black-and-white terms (and actually never have), it does no good when the the left plays up the morality problems of Trump. In fact it just reminds evangelicals that the left are idiots in the myopia. Kinda doesn't work to play up "Access Holywood" tapes when everyone knows there's more to leadership than past moral failures.

__________________
What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand???

Re: More Americans Say Personal Immorality Not Disqualifying for Elected Officials

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Shoe

Unfortunately for the left, more than anyone, this presents them a conundrum. Because evangelical protestants don't see things in such black-and-white terms (and actually never have), it does no good when the the left plays up the morality problems of Trump. In fact it just reminds evangelicals that the left are idiots in the myopia. Kinda doesn't work to play up "Access Holywood" tapes when everyone knows there's more to leadership than past moral failures.

I disagree. Everything is black and white. One candidate claimed no one is qualified to be President unless they started the started the day on their knees. That's as black and white as it gets. I can give other examples.

Re: More Americans Say Personal Immorality Not Disqualifying for Elected Officials

Quote:

Originally Posted by foundit66

I've heard people repeatedly criticize atheists on the issue of morality. Some people evidently have limited or no comprehension how a moral structure can exist without somebody telling you what to think...

I found the below quite amusing in that context.

No group has shifted their position more dramatically than white evangelical Protestants. More than seven in ten (72%) white evangelical Protestants say an elected official can behave ethically even if they have committed transgressions in their personal life—a 42-point jump from 2011, when only 30 % of white evangelical Protestants said the same. Roughly six in ten white mainline Protestants (60%) and Catholics (58%) also believe elected officials can behave honestly and ethically in their public roles regardless of their personal behavior. In 2011, only about four in ten white mainline Protestants (38%) and Catholics (42%) held this view. Notably, religiously unaffiliated Americans have remained constant in their views; six in ten (60%) believe elected officials who behave immorally in their personal lives can still perform their duties with integrity, compared to 63% in 2011.

Re: More Americans Say Personal Immorality Not Disqualifying for Elected Officials

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimbo

I disagree. Everything is black and white. One candidate claimed no one is qualified to be President unless they started the started the day on their knees. That's as black and white as it gets. I can give other examples.

I may have not explained myself clearly. What I mean is, I think most evangelicals (in fact most PEOPLE) don't see LEADERSHIP and what it takes to lead the country in such black and white terms. They know it's more complicated than that. Obviously they do, because this story bears it out.

__________________
What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand???

Re: More Americans Say Personal Immorality Not Disqualifying for Elected Officials

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Shoe

Unfortunately for the left, more than anyone, this presents them a conundrum. Because evangelical protestants don't see things in such black-and-white terms (and actually never have)...

Did you even bother to read the article?
It showed by their response to questions over time how it has shifted.
So this crap about "well, that's not the way it is..." is just your personal anecdotal way of ignoring the topic.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Shoe

... it does no good when the the left plays up the morality problems of Trump. In fact it just reminds evangelicals that the left are idiots in the myopia.

That's your opinion which is basically a meaningless counter-attack while the actual documenting article goes ignored.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Shoe

Kinda doesn't work to play up "Access Holywood" tapes when everyone knows there's more to leadership than past moral failures.

So why did their positions shift over time?

The truth is their candidate was RECOGNIZED as morally deficient, so evangelicals decided it wasn't important to them anymore.

__________________
“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.”
~Abraham Lincoln